NBA salaries of U-M alums
Other than Crawford's new deal, nobody is really raking in big money right now. But it does appear they almost all got a slight bump via the new salary cap. These figures are off of ESPN for 2016-17 season:
Crawford: $13,352,012
Burke: $3,386,598
Stauskas: $2,993,040
THJ: $2,281,605
LeVert: $1,562,280
McGary: $1,526,040
GR3: $1,050,500
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
For a sports blog, I am rather surprised at the number of people who were apparently unaware that even the lowest paid NBA players make more than the average American working stiff.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
The real question is, of those players, who will have the highest salary on their second contract? My money is on Stauskas.
But I live in Atlanta so maybe that's part of it.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I don't care what anyone says. No one who plays basketball deserves over 3 million a year. That is a ton of money. I love sports and it is entertainment for hundreds of thousands of people but what are we talking about here? 20 million a year to dribble a ball and shoot hoops. Guys like Navy Seals should at least get a million then right?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Plus--at least in the private sector compared to government jobs-- how much they earn is a direct reflection of how much worth they're providing the marketplace. The salary isn't determined by any one individual--it's a collective deicsion we make as a society. The reason an athlete or entertain can make X millions of dollars per year is because they're worth more than that in terms of value to either team owners, ticket/event promoters, corporate sponsors, etc. And the reason the team owners, event promotors, corporate sponsors, etc. decide those athletes and entertainers are worth it is because collectively we as a society prove over the course of years that it IS worth it--when they hire XYZ actor or athlete, we collectively are willing to pay those millions by being entertained by those actors or athletes or when they do celebrity of endorsements we collectively buy more of that product.
Granted, some entertainers and athletes are underpaid--in which case you would think eventually the marketplace (and the athlete/entertainer themself) would figure that out and boost their income. And conversely, if somebody is OVERPAID for their performance, eventualy the marketplace will figure that out too. And it even has only tangental relationship to how HARD somebody works. It plays a part in a competitve marketplace since it's likely to boost the skill or ability of the person who is working hard. But it's not always the case. Somebody could work 24/7 making buggy whips, but if nobody drives buggy & horse carriages anymore, that guy is going to go broke. Or somebody could be naturally gifted and not have to work hard to provide alot of value.
Bottom line is, barring theft or fraud, it has everything to do with how much collective value they're providing the rest of the marketplace. Simple supply & demand.
We all sure as heck reap the benefits. Freedom should probably cost a little bit more than it actually does.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Have to say it. I was surprised by Crawford's salary.